ar-debate

Orchestrate structured multi-role debates to adjudicate research decisions.

Updated Mar 22, 2026

Search Tags:#workflow #research #transparency #debate #ai-assistant #adjudication #multirole

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/ShinyGua/AutoArtsResearch --skill ar-debate

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: ar-debate
Source: https://github.com/ShinyGua/AutoArtsResearch/tree/main/.claude/skills/ar-debate
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/ShinyGua/AutoArtsResearch --skill ar-debate

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Orchestrates a structured multi-role debate workflow to adjudicate high-stakes research decisions, improving rigor and transparency in decision-making.

Core Features & Use Cases

Structured Debate Protocol: defines Proposer, Skeptic, Counterevidence Miner, Validity Critic, and Judge roles with independent positions, critiques, and adjudication.
Configurable Debates: supports multiple debate types (e.g., topic selection, theory choice, method fit, claim adjudication, rival explanations, final revision) and generates a final decision document.
Audit Trails & Outputs: saves round-wise transcripts and a final JSON outcome for reproducibility and governance.

Quick Start

Initiate a structured multi-role debate on the provided proposal and debate type to obtain a final adjudicated decision.

Frequently Asked Questions about ar-debate

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema

How do I adjudicate competing research hypotheses using a structured debate?▼

To adjudicate competing research hypotheses, this Skill orchestrates a structured multi-role debate with defined roles like Proposer, Skeptic, and Judge. It outputs independent positions, critiques, and a final adjudicated decision for high-stakes choices.

Can I use multi-role debate for theory choice and method fit decisions in social sciences?▼

Yes, multi-role debate supports theory choice and method fit decisions in arts and social sciences. It applies a configurable debate protocol to evaluate competing proposals and generates a final decision document for research rigor.

What is the best way to ensure transparency when evaluating rival explanations in research?▼

The best way to ensure transparency when evaluating rival explanations is using a debate workflow that saves round-wise transcripts and a final JSON outcome. This creates audit trails for reproducibility and governance of the adjudication process.

Does multi-role debate require a predefined protocol to adjudicate high-stakes decisions?▼

Yes, multi-role debate requires a defined debate protocol, named roles, and an accessible workspace to adjudicate high-stakes decisions. These prerequisites ensure the structured workflow produces independent positions and valid critiques.

How do I start a structured debate for final revision claim adjudication?▼

To start a structured debate for final revision claim adjudication, initiate the workflow with your provided proposal and debate type. The Skill will orchestrate roles like Counterevidence Miner and Validity Critic to obtain a final decision.

When should I not use structured multi-role debate for research decisions?▼

You should not use structured multi-role debate for low-stakes or straightforward research decisions lacking competing hypotheses. The workflow requires distinct rival proposals or claims to generate meaningful independent positions, critiques, and final adjudication.